Veteran reporter Bob Woodward on Friday told radio host Hugh Hewitt he looked "hard" for evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia but didn't find anything.

But he still thinks the special counsel Robert Mueller has "something" on the president.

Woodward suggested Mueller possibly has "a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony." Trump has firmly rejected allegations of collusion between his campaign and Russia in the 2016 US presidential election and often refers to the Mueller probe as a "witch hunt."

Veteran reporter Bob Woodward on Friday told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt he looked "hard" for evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia but didn't find anything....

Boy this tells us what a Globalist Hack / Never Trumper Hugh Hewitt is . Bob the liar knew a fellow DC uniparty Trumper hater hack like fraud Hugh would play Patty Cake with him . Only a left site like Bus Insider would think Hugh is Conservative since no one there has ever met one.

Uncovering the Russia ties of Hillarys campaign chief

Lawmakers failed to seize on an alarming development in the Russia collusion story last week, one that should spark serious and immediate congressional inquiry.

But it didnt involve President Trump or his administration.

During a heated Fox Business interview with Maria Bartiromo, Hillary Clintons former campaign chief John Podesta made a series of misleading statements when questioned about his involvement in a company that received $35 million from the Russian government while Clinton served as secretary of state.

On Jan. 18, 2011, a small green-energy company named Joule Unlimited announced Podestas appointment to its board. Months later, Rusnano, a Kremlin-backed investment fund founded by Vladimir Putin, pumped $35 million into Joule. Serving alongside Podesta on Joules board were senior Russian official Anatoly Chubais and oligarch Ruben Vardanyan, who has been appointed by Putin to a Russian economic modernization council.

Bartiromo asked Podesta why he failed to disclose his role in Joule as required by law when he entered the White House in January 2014 to serve as counselor to President Barack Obama.

But according to his own financial disclosure form, Podesta only listed two of the three entities that made up Joule Unlimited, failing to disclose his presence on the board of the Dutch-registered Stichting Joule Global Foundation.

When Bartiromo pressed Podesta on the whereabouts of his 75,000 shares of Joule stock, Podesta resorted to Clintonesque semantics: I didnt have any stock in any Russian company!

Notice the rhetorical sleight of tongue there: Joule is based in Massachusetts, not Russia, making Podestas statement technically true. Podesta added: And by the way, I divested before I went into the White House.

Yet again, its not that simple. WikiLeaks documents reveal that when he joined the Obama White House, Podesta transferred his Joule shares to an LLC controlled by his adult children. He also resumed communicating with Joule and Joule investors after leaving the White House and joining Clintons campaign. In fact, he received an invoice from his lawyers in April 2015  a consent request for Dmitry Akhanov of Rusnano USA to join Joules board.

But nothing to see here, Podesta insisted.

I was on the board of an American company that did business here and only here, he said. The Russian company had a small investment in that company. We can go round and around the tree.

Was Joules business here and only here in America as Podesta claimed? Not according to Joules own CEO and president, Bill Sims. While thanking Putins Rusnano, Sims said the investment would help support the development of our global presence and complements the companys expansion plans in Europe, the Middle East, and Mexico. Moreover, Stichting Joule is itself an overseas entity. Indeed, Rusnanos investment in Joule was in part to develop a manufacturing facility in Russia.

And what about Podestas contention that Putins investment fund represented a small investment in Joule? In 2012 the company claimed it had raised $110 million to date.

That meant the Kremlin-backed $35 million investment given to Joule after Podestas board appointment represented over 30 percent of Joules outside financing.

Theres also this inconvenient fact: In 2016, Russias largest bank, Sberbank, where Joule board member Reuben Vardanyan formerly served as head of its investment banking division, had a $170,000 lobbying contract with the Podesta Group  which is owned by John Podestas brother, Tony Podesta.

In short, Clintons top campaign chief and a senior counselor to Obama sat on Joules board alongside top Russian officials as Putins Kremlin-backed investment fund funneled $35 million into Joule. No one looking at the Podesta fact pattern can claim to care about rooting out Russian collusion and not rigorously investigate the tangle of relationships.

Are US officials investigating the matter? We dont know. When Bartiromo asked Podesta whether his closed-door session in front of the House Intelligence Committee included questions about his Russian ties and Joule, Podesta punted: I have already told you that I was asked not to talk about specific questions, and I said I would respect that.

After the slippery answers Podesta delivered during his explosive Fox Business interview, US officials have more reasons than ever to demand answers about John Podesta, Joule Unlimited and Putins Rusnano investment fund. If they werent investigating Podesta before, they should be now.

Sen. DAmato Drops Bomb: Hillary Allowed Russia to Take Ownership of US Uranium to Sell to Iran

Jim Hoft Jul 3rd, 2016

Former Senator Al DAmato (R-NY) dropped a bomb on Sunday Morning Futures this AM. DAmato told Maria Bartiromo that Hillary allowed Russia to take ownership of US uranium so they could sell it to Iran.

Hillary made it possible for the Russians to take control of one of our huge uranium producers and allow them to own the company, export the uranium and who do they sell the uranium to? Iran!

Now if people knew that and that the foundation as a result of that got $135 million. I think people would start saying, What?

Its true. In January 2013, Pravda celebrated the Russian atomic energy agencys purchase of the company Uranium One in Canada.

That same company, Uranium One, owned uranium concessions in the United States. Because uranium is a strategically important commodity, the Russians would need approval from the Obama administration, including Hillarys State Department, before the purchase took place.

Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval.

The Clintons took the cash from Uranium One officials before the deal was approved by Hillary Clintons State Department. The Clintons hid the donations which is a clear violation of the Memorandum of Understanding Hillary Clinton signed with the Obama administration wherein she promised and agreed to publicly disclose all donations during her tenure as Secreatary of State. (Via Breitbart)

The New York Times reported on the crooked deal in 2015.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium Ones chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And then theres this...

Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) told Greta Van Susteren the deal Hillary approved gave Putin ownership of 20 percent of US uranium and Russia sells uranium to unfriendly countries, including Iran.

Obama allowing Iran to purchase uranium from Russia

Daniel Horowitz | January 10, 2017

Remember those side deals Obama forged with Iran that were not part of the text of the official treaty? Now we are finding out some of the details.

Yesterday, the Washington Free Beacon reported that Iranian officials confirmed they have received at least $10 billion in cash, commodities, and assets from Washington since 2013. And that is likely a conservative estimate.

But cash is not the only thing the Islamic Republic of Iran is receiving for gracing us with their willingness to sign onto our own capitulation.

The AP is reporting that Russia, with the support of President Obama, is shipping Iran 116 metric tons of natural uranium.

While Iranian officials have obviously declined to disclose the use of such uranium, AP notes that this is enough to enrich weapons-grade uranium for nuclear bombs:

Despite present restrictions on its enrichment program, however, the amount of natural uranium is significant should Iran decide to keep it in storage, considering its potential uses once some limits on Tehrans nuclear activities start to expire in less than a decade.

David Albright, whose Institute of Science and International Security often briefs U.S. lawmakers on Irans nuclear program, says the shipment could be enriched to enough weapons-grade uranium for more than 10 simple nuclear bombs, depending on the efficiency of the enrichment process and the design of the nuclear weapon. ...

"In a 2014 New Yorker interview, Obama said his goal was to create a 'new equilibrium' in the Middle East.

In the short run, at least, his signature diplomatic undertaking can be counted on to bring more violence to this volatile region.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the [Obama-Putin Iran deal] agreement is formally known, provides the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism an infusion of somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 billion of unfrozen assets and a great deal more of continuing revenues as businesses and governments around the world rush to profit from oil-and-gas-rich Iran's reintegration into the world economy.

The agreement relaxes the international isolation of the Islamic Republic and ratifies Tehran's status as a nuclear threshold state. And it relieves restrictions on Iran's acquisition of weapons, including ballistic missiles. ..."

John Podestas Payoff for Helping Hillary Give American Military Technology to Russias Putin

As part of just-inaugurated President Obamas new foreign policy to improve relations between the United States and Russia, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Russias Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in March 2009. Meeting in her hotels Salon Panorama in Geneva, she presented him with a small gift box containing a bright red button symbolizing the Obama administrations desire to reset the relationship between the two governments.

Thus began an effort to transfer American technology to Russian President Vladimir Putins own Silicon Valley, called Skolkovo.

In a report released in late July by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) entitled From Russia With Money, authors Stephen Bannon and Peter Schweitzer reviewed the long sordid history of the technology transfer from companies such as Google, Intel, and Cisco of hi-tech technology with useful military applications.

The report quoted warnings from the FBI and the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth that the transfer would work against American interests. Warned the U.S. Army:

[The reset would serve as] a vehicle for world-wide technology transfers to Russia in the areas of information technology, biomedicine, energy, satellite and space technology, and nuclear technology.

It was clearly a quid pro quo arrangement: 17 of the 28 companies involved in the technology transfer gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation or to Bill Clinton for giving some speeches.

When those authors, both of whom are affiliated with Breitbart News, summed up their conclusions, one question remained: The GAI investigative report says its unclear how much, if any, money [John] Podesta made. Podesta, having served the Clintons for years, first as chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and then as counselor to President Obama and finally as Hillarys campaign chairman, deserved a payoff.

But it wasnt clear until the latest batch of e-mails provided by WikiLeaks went public last week that Americans now know. For his efforts Podesta received thousands of shares of common and preferred stock in one of the companies involved in the transfer. The fact came to light when WikiLeaks published e-mails Podesta sent to the company ordering it to transfer his shares to a shell corporation he had created a month earlier.

The e-mails included a letter Podesta wrote to the corporate secretary of that company instructing him to retitle 33,693 shares of preferred stock to Leonidio Holdings, LLC, a corporation that Podesta (or one of his staff) created using a Corporation Service Company to hide the shares from public view.

The company that gave Podesta the stock shares, Joule Unlimited, claims to be a producer of alternative energy technology that will eventually be able to produce energy that will be competitive with oil priced at $50 a barrel. It was a recipient of millions of Putins rubles as one of the gang of companies working to transfer American technology to Russia, one of Americas enemies.

As Schweizer told the New York Post in an interview in July:

The Clintons, they get their donations and speaking fees in the millions of dollars. The Russians get access to advanced US technology. The tech companies get special access to the Russian market and workforce .

All I ask is that people look at the money. Who made the deals, who benefited from the deals?

Thanks to WikiLeaks the people now know the name of at least one of those who participated in the deals and how he benefited from them: John Podesta, Hillarys campaign manager.

WikiLeaks Show How Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta Became Business Partners with Vladimir Putin

...WikiLeaks emails provide proof that the Clintons have a long and lucrative history of financial deals with the Russians, particularly with the Russian government.

Schweizer explained the deep ties the Clintons have to Russia, specifically how in 2010 then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton approved the sale and transfer of 20% of U.S. uranium output to the Russian government ...

Woodward suggested Mueller possibly has "a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony."

If a person changes their testimony then they are, by definition, an unreliable witness. You can use their testimony to acquit someone else of a crime, but you cant use it to convict. Putting such an unreliable witness on the stand could be grounds to disbar the attorney.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.